PURPOSE: Several retrospective analyses have suggested that obese men with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have outcomes inferior to those of normal-weight men. However, a recently presented analysis for the first time challenged this association between body mass index (BMI) and treatment failure. It is therefore important to provide further data on this issue. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was a retrospective analysis of 564 men treated with risk-adapted conformal EBRT at a single institution. Low-risk patients received EBRT alone, and the other patients received EBRT plus endocrine treatment. In addition, high-risk patients were treated to higher EBRT doses (74 Gy). A rectal balloon catheter for internal immobilization, which can be identified on portal images, was used in 261 patients (46%). Thus, localization did not rely on bony landmarks alone in these cases. RESULTS: The median BMI was 26, and 15% of patients had BMI≥30. Neither univariate nor multivariate analyses detected any significant impact of BMI on biochemical relapse, prostate cancer-specific survival, or overall survival. The 5-year biochemical relapse rate was 21% and prostate cancer-specific survival 96%. CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis of a large cohort of consecutively treated patients suggests that efforts to reduce prostate movement and geographic miss might result in comparable outcomes in obese and normal-weight patients.
PURPOSE: Several retrospective analyses have suggested that obesemen with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have outcomes inferior to those of normal-weight men. However, a recently presented analysis for the first time challenged this association between body mass index (BMI) and treatment failure. It is therefore important to provide further data on this issue. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was a retrospective analysis of 564 men treated with risk-adapted conformal EBRT at a single institution. Low-risk patients received EBRT alone, and the other patients received EBRT plus endocrine treatment. In addition, high-risk patients were treated to higher EBRT doses (74 Gy). A rectal balloon catheter for internal immobilization, which can be identified on portal images, was used in 261 patients (46%). Thus, localization did not rely on bony landmarks alone in these cases. RESULTS: The median BMI was 26, and 15% of patients had BMI≥30. Neither univariate nor multivariate analyses detected any significant impact of BMI on biochemical relapse, prostate cancer-specific survival, or overall survival. The 5-year biochemical relapse rate was 21% and prostate cancer-specific survival 96%. CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis of a large cohort of consecutively treated patients suggests that efforts to reduce prostate movement and geographic miss might result in comparable outcomes in obese and normal-weight patients.
Authors: Per Munck af Rosenschöld; Neil B Desai; Jung Hun Oh; Aditya Apte; Margie Hunt; Abraham Kalikstein; James Mechalakos; Laura Happersett; Joseph O Deasy; Michael J Zelefsky Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Lora S Wang; Colin T Murphy; Karen Ruth; Nicholas G Zaorsky; Marc C Smaldone; Mark L Sobczak; Alexander Kutikov; Rosalia Viterbo; Eric M Horwitz Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jonas Schiffmann; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Michael Rink; L Manka; Georg Salomon; Derya Tilki; Lars Budäus; Raisa Pompe; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Alexander Haese; P Hammerer; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Pierre Tennstedt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Mario Rivera-Izquierdo; Javier Pérez de Rojas; Virginia Martínez-Ruiz; Miguel Ángel Arrabal-Polo; Beatriz Pérez-Gómez; José Juan Jiménez-Moleón Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 5.455